The Sun. — London, England, 1838-01-23 00:00:00

------- --------- representative of the Canadian House of Assembly, and also with reference to some pecuniary arrangements between the colony and that country. Such being the state of the case, h: t h oug ht it was better o n the whole on an occasion which was one o f stole very great importance, that the H ouse should hear. Mr. Roebu 4 ek in the character which he assumed, not as the assent fur the province—not as the agent appointed by any Bill consented to by the Governor of that province, hut as the agent chosen by the House of Assembly to represent their interests. The lion. Gentleman who had last spoken had proposed that they should hear Mr. Roebuck in his individual capacity ; but he could assure the Honourable Gentleman that that would be a precedent much more injurious in its consequences than hearing him in the capacity of agent. la the character lie as,umed, as agent for the House of Assembly, there could be .. no objection on a question of great importance to that Colony, to hear an agent appointed by it, and who bad received a sa lary as such, but if they heard him merely as Mr. Roebuck, in his individual capacity, he thought hereafter it might be open to any person to say " I take a great interest in the af fairs of a certain colony or in a certain Bill, and there fore I request to be heard at the bar in opposition to this Bill." That would, in his opinion, be a worse precedent than the one lie was prepared to recommend. lie was upon those reasons ready to agree to the motion of the Honourable Mem ber for London. The proper question to be before the House was, that the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Bill be then read, upon which it would be open for the Honourable Member, or any one who bad the same opinions, to make any motion they pleased. til . , Lord STANLEY quite agreed with the Noble Lord that fie present Government could not by any possibility have any reaeon to oppose the hearing of Mr. Roebuck in his character of agent. That gentleman had bc-n received by the Colonial office as the agent of the House of Assembly ; the Goecra ment had given their sanction to the assumption of the Learned Gentleman, and therefore they could not now object to hear him in that character, He believed that they were the only Government who had ever received a gentleman in such a characte.e Up to the nresent Government there was not one who had ever received a gentleman as the agent of a colony permanently residing in this enuntry. The case most analogous to the present one was that of 1:• Yigat—he was authorised to appear here as the counsel of th:.` House of Assembly. It was the only colony that had claimed !he right of being half represented in England. In 18.28 the pe ,Siteon was that the colony should appoint an agent, and the recomi2 endati° , n in 182 e was that the colonies should be allowed to appoil7t "y. Bill an agent for the whole colony. But from the peculiar circumstances into which that colony had been plunged, the two branches of the Legislature had never been able to agree upon t. t ee individual who should appear armed with the autho rity and character of colonial agent. He had thought it necessary to follow his Honourable Friend in the pro test which he bad made, particularly after the state ment of the Noble Lord opposite, who appeared in all respects to recognize the right of Mr. Roebuck to be heard. For his (Lord Stanley's) own part, if he followed his own judgment in an ordinary case, he should consider it would be difficult to say Mr. Roebuck ought not to appear. If he fol lowed his own feelings, he should say, by all means, give Mr. Roebuck every latitude you can.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") But the difficulty ae felt in the present instance was this:— if this were an ordinary transaction, affecting the whole of the colony, the ordinary and clear course would be for the Hoose of Assembly to appoint, pro hac vice, a person as agent for the colony, and praying to be heard at the bar of the House by counsel. That would be the proper course to be pursued in an ordinary case, but the difficulty was that there would be no time for the House of Assembly to be con sulted. They would have no notice of this Bill before it was in all probability passed into a law—at all events they would have no notice of it before it was read a second time when the House would have adopted the principle of the mea sures. He had therefore to decide between two difficulties, eitheriof,hearing a gentleman at the bar of the House who did not stand in the situation of Counsel; on the other hand of de priving from being heard a party by the mouth of a gentleman vebom be was bound to say faithfully represented that party. He had no hesitation in saving that Mr. Roebuck very accu rately represented the feelings of the House of Asembly ; he had likewise no hesitation in saying that if that body were convened, he had little doubt that Mr. Roebuck would have been the person who would have been entrusted with the advocacy of their cause before that House; that being the case, he confessed that against his judge 1 went, in an ordinary case, he would give his con sent to hear Mr. Roebuck upon the question, even' waving the technical difficulty of hearing him as the agent' of the House of Assembly. He would not hear him, howevere as a matter of right, but as a matter of favour. Sir G. GRE Y could not concur with many of the statements of the Noble Lord. It had been suggested by a Noble Friend: of his that the petition should be presented and laid on the. table, e in order that the point it involved should be decided after due deliberation. He thought that no person would ob ject to Me. Roebuck being heard, looking at the situation of Lower ICanat.'a and the provisions of the Bill that had been brought' in for its better regulation. When the Noble Lord as'un:ed that the Government had recognised Mr. Roebuck as the agent of Canada, he begged to remind him of the manner in which Monsieur Vigat had bee recognised by the Government when the Noble Lord was a the head of the Colonial department.—( Cheers.) Th salary of Monsieur Vigat was for several years included i , the contingent fund, and was voted by the House of Assembly , and the payment was made by the Governor and the authority of a Bill which had met with the sanction of th Noble ,Lord.—( Crica of " No, no," from Lord Stanley. If he was wrong he wished to be corrected.—( Cheers from th Opposition. ) He again asserted that the Government hat not recognised Mr. Roebuck so much as the Governmen of the Noble Loed had recognised the employment of M. Vigat. It did not appear lit that dispatch that the Noble Lord though 1 right to refuse the assent of the Crown to the salar which had been greeted by both Houses of the Le gislature of Lower Canada to Mr. Vigat.—( Hear, hear, bear,) As Mr. Vigat had access to the Colonial Offic so, in the same way, did Mr. Roebuck have that access—h had been only admitted in courtesy, and as any Gentle= would be admitted on behalf of any interest in Lowe Canada._(Bear, hear.) Why did not lion. Gentlemc opposite raise +his question when a motion was brought fore ward by the lion. ;limber for Shrewsbury in the last Parli mere, worded so as to exclude from Parliament the paid agen of the Colonial Assembly? Mr. Roebuck was then express! recognized by the House as the agent of the House of As membly.—( Hear, hear.) Having secured against a preceded being established, it would be better now at once to pass th motion, waiving an objection that savoured rather of speci p'eadine.—( Hear.) Mr. C. B ULLER said that as the Hon, Baronet had stet that he had been unable to obtain a copy of the answer, I was desirous to ask him in order to clear up this matter, if It could tax his recollection as to whether it was not eornewh to this elfect—" Sir, as you say that you have been appeinte here not as the agent of the Province, but of the House 0 Assembly, I should he happy to see you."—( Laughter, an cries of " Hear, hear.") The feeling of the majority of th House appeared to be in favour of hearing M:. Roebuck, an the only dissentients were those who agreed with his Hon. Friend, who had suggested the ingenious and valuable prece dent of hearing Mr. Roebuck, not in his official but in his individual capacity.—(" No, no," from Sir George Grey.) Well, then, in no capacity at all.—(Loud laughter.) That was a question which could not for a moment be enter tained by the House. See the precedent the Hon. Baronet would set. If they heard Mr. Roebuck in his individual ca pacity on that Bill, why not hear him •on every other—( Loud laughter)—and for his part there was no one in that House he would rather than that gentle man. lie hoped the Honourable Baronet would give an answer to the question which he had put to him, as to whether or not the terms of Lord Gienelg's letter were such as he had stated. Sir GEORGE GREY said that he had no recollection whatever of the terms of the letter ; they might possibly be such as the Hon. Member had stated, but he had before said that he had been prevented from obtaining a copy of it, by circumstances over which he had no control. Mr. GLA DSTONE made some observation, which was inaudible in the Gallery. Mr. HUME then rose, and was received with cries of " Oh, oh," from the Opposition. The Hon. Member said that as it appeared to be the wish of the majority of the House that Mr. Roebuck should be heard, he wished to know whether he was to be heard before the second reading of the Bill, or before the House had affirmed the principle of the 13111 by agreeing to the second reading of it. he was aware that the precedents heretofore were in favour of the former course, but the latter appeared to him to be more strictly in accordance with the common sense view of the subject. If they allowed the second reading of the Bill to pass without a division, it appeared to hint that they would have affirmed the principle, and they would thus shut out the information which Mr. Roebuck wished to lay before them. If the practice was against this they ought to depart from it, and Mr. Roebuck ought to be heard on the second reading of the Bill, and before the second reading tools place. Mr. GROTE believed it was di.tinctly understood that the second reading was not to be taken as a recognition of the principle of' the Bill, and that there would be an opportunity of debating it on a subsequent stage. Mr. HUME protested against the principle of the Bill. — (Cries of " Spoke.") He should oppose the second reading it' he was to be prevented from entering his protest. The SPEAKER then put the question that Mr. Roebuck be heard at the bar, which was agreed to. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the Bill be read a second time. . Mr. HUME suggested in order that Mr. Roebuck might be well heard, the same indulgence should be given to him as had been given to Mr. O'Connell and others, by advancing the Bar. lie therefore moved that the same accommodation be allowed to Mr. Roebuck, which was on a former occasion al lowed to Mr. O'Connell. The Officers of the House then proceeded to advance the Bar beyond the usual limits on the floor of the House, amidst cries of " No, no," from the Opposition, responded by cries of " Yes" from the Ministerial side. Mr. Roebuck at this time appeared below the bar, having a pile of books in his arms. He was about to lay them on the bar, when an Hon. Member on the last seat of the front Opposition bench called out " No, no." Mr. WARBURTON was understood to ask the Speaker, whether the House bad not decided that the bar should be moved into the House ?—( Cries of " Yes, yes," and" No, no.") The SPEAKER said that he was sorry if he had mis taken the sense of the House; but he had thought the decision of the House to be in favour of the motion of the Bon. Member for Kilkenny, that the bar should be advanced upon the floor of the House, as the ayes predominated, and no 'notion in the negative was made. The' BON. NIEMBEII above alluded to, from the end of the Upp(Aitioitbetielles, nio' riuo • tho bib- b e c ,,_ried btc'i to its usual place. The SPEAKE R—Docs the Hon. lieln'"er move d cries of " No, no !") The HON. MEmumt —Yes ; I move that the tar be carri d back to its usual place.—( Repeated cries of " No, no : The SPEAKER—Does the Hon. Member move?—(Cres of " No, no!") The HON. MEstnEtt bowed to the S?eaker, and sat d et/ n, intimating that he withdrew his motion. The SPEAKER then called Mr. Roebuck to the bar, And the Bill having been read, he said that the House had cm seated to hear the Learned. Gentleman. Mr. Roebuck said—Sir, I have to mention in the com mencement of my address to this Ilcnourable House the very peculiar position in which I appear before you, and 1 can more fully explain the circumstances in which:l stand in the course of my address, than I was able to do in my petition to be heard in this place. I appear before you as the authorised agent of the House of Assembly of Lower Canada ; and I hold in my hand the at tested resolution of that body, by which I am appointed ; and, if it be pleasing to your House, I will hand it in, to be read by your Clerk. I also hold in my hand the letter of the Speaker of that 1-louse, communi cating to me the resolution of the House of Assembly—which letter, inasmuch as it contains flattering expressions towards myself, I would rather hand to your Clerk, to be read by him, than that I should read it myself. ( Hear, hear, hear.) I do not know whether the House will object to these documents being read—they show that I appear before you as the authorised agent of the House of Assembly, and under peculiar circumstances, Sir, which I hope will gain for nie . the kind consideration of the House. Old asso ciations may possibly induce me to forget, under the excitement of the moment, the acknowledged relation in which I stand here. It may so happen, that in my address to the House, I shall be called upon to use some strong expressions; and I beg to state, at this period of my address, that I have a right to use them, I am here to accuse successive administrations of bad Government in the province of Canada. I am here to defend, against a Bill of pains and penalties, the House of Assembly of Lower Canada; and in defending them I am here to accuse the present Admi nistration of high crimes and misdemeanours, and inasmuch as I do not consider her Majesty's present Ministers any portion of this House, I am not bound to use towards them that respectful deference which I should be willing to use towards this House. Nevertheless, in addressing you, Sir, as its representative and head, I shall endeavour to maintain all - ener decorum to the assembled Commons of England. But pr , • - ecie had now before it two parties to be tried—the this II " - ' semblv on the one hand, and her Majesty's Mi - House of As . - - nisters on the oth::: A Bill of Pains and Poi - 4416es is now "'"use—a Bill of Pains and penalties on the table of Your ta. through their assembled against the whole people, that Bill of Pains representatives and who suggests and Penalties ? Why, Sir, I shall have to sal," it is s h uggeeted ought by the guilty parties on this occasion—by those e o lt to be punished—and not the House of Assembly. - shall be my duty to prove in the course of my address, that every act of the House of Assembly has been go , verned by the greatest wisdom—that they have acted in a just and wise policy—advocating no demands which the interests of their constituents did not require of them to ad. vanes—that as they have successfully won for themselves, step by step, their demands, they arc acknowledged to be just; and at last, when you are now called on to pass a Bill of Pains and Penalties against the virtuous representations of a people, that has arisen from a state of things brought about not by the misconduct of the House of the Assembly, but by the vacillation, the weakness, the imbecility, and the strange inconsistency of her Majesty's Ministers, and not by the conduct of the House of Assembly of Lower Canada. This, Sir, is the position in which I am placed. I have to throw myself before the House as the ad vocate of the absent—as the advocate of those whom every one thinks himself at liberty to abuse, and to whom every base passion and motive has been applied—as the advocate of those distant parties who are 3,000 miles removed from us, and who are strua:glingfor their liberties and rights of their country ; and I hope that I shall not plead in vain to the good feeling of an assembled body of my countrymen to hear me patiently while I do all in my power to defend the absent—while I endeavour to defend those who have no other advocate than the humble individual who now appears at your bar. You are about to pass a Bill which would be much more appropri ate—which would disgrace the servile inhabitants of Hindostan —a Bill more calculated for them than for any free and popularly-represented colonists of Great Britain. It may be said, Sir, that while I appear here as the advocate of others, I require to defend myself ; it may be said that I myself require defence ; but however such things may be said out of doors, however the epithet of traitor and rebel may be showered on me out of doors, I am sure that in this House I shall not be so accused, because it is well known that here I cannot defend myself. It may be said that in this case I am an interested party—it has been said that I am interested in obtaining a separation between the two countries —a separation between the colony and the mother country. I entreat Hon. Members to ask themselves whether they could possibly entertain such opinions from any part of my conduct? I am an Englishman—l have no hope uncon nected with England. I am an Englishman, and have no in terests connected with Canada. I have many dear friends in that country, but while with honour it is possible to keep up the connect'on between the two countries, no man in the world will do more to maintain such connection than I will ; but if such a connection cannot be maintained without dis honour, I will be the first to do all in my power to put an end to it. But, Sir, I beg the House to recollect that all my interests— personal interests—and interests even of the lowest possible description, are in favour of a connection with Canada; and let no man dream or think that I wish to rake up rebellion, or that it is for my interest to do so. Now, I beg to say in the out set of what I have to observe, that I am here to defend the House of Assembly of Lower Canada. I have nothing to do with any other Province. I have nothing to do with any other subject. I am here to defend the House of Assembly of Lower Canada. I am not here to justify revolt. Revolt must justify itself. I am not here to justify it under any circumstances. if revolt be successful it justifies itself ; if it be not successful it must be fellowed by obloquy. I make no distinction, Sir. I see rebellious Poland, and I do not justify Poland. I am not one, and never was, to pass Acts of Parliament for the support of 'rebellious rights. I look to Spain—l do not . support rebellion there ; I never did, Sir, and I hope I never shall. I may look all round the world ; I look to Belgium, and though England may have barn bound by the most solemn treaties to maintain the connexion between Belgium and Holland, Belgium was successful, and therefore I hope she was right. But, Sir, I for my own part cannot understand that class of morality that can have a sympathy for the rebellious Poles—can speak of them as if they were heroes, and yet talk with contempt and hatred of the poor peasants of St. Charles. It may suit some party to say the rebellion in Brussels was an heroic act—it failed in unfortunate Canada. It may suit some parties to say they have called into existence a new world, nernely, the rebellious colonies of Spain, and the same party may say they have great abhorrence of rebellious Canada. This, Sir, is a species of fascinating morality I can not un derstand. I have nothing to do with revolt ; all I have to show is, that the House of Assembly of Lower Canada are in no way connected with it. I will show diet the parth s who are endeavouring to put upon their backs the weight of this rebellion, Iwo the parties who ought to bear it, together with the shuffling policy that would make men be. lieve that a body of men consisting of 87 or 83, scattered through a large district of between seven or eight hundred miles—they and they alone arc the parties—the authors of the rebellion that took place—those, are the parties who are guilty, because they do acts which of necessity excite great feelings of distrust: and yet do nothing to show that the rebel lion shall be fruitless. Thus, Sir', having pieced before the House the parties is he are to be tried, viz. her Ma jesty's Ministers on the one hand, and the House of A:- sembly on the other, I am about to prove to you that the House of Assembly is not only not guilty, but deserving of ,the admiration of their own constituents, this country, and the world, for the magnanimous stand they have made against *he overwhelming power of Great Britain. I have to lay before you, Sir, a great number of facts connected with the history of Canada, upon which the House is to de cide whether the House of Assembly toe acted properly or nor. I shall first go through the statemeuts for the pur pose of endeavouring to show that the Bill upon your table is an unjust Bill. I shall endeavour to show that the Howse of Assembly are guiltless, and I shall endeavour to prove that the Bill is an impolitic Bill. I shall then endeavour to show that there is a method which, if adopted by this Howe, will put an end to all disagreements ; but that if you once adopt your re solutions, war, misery. and calamity will be the consequences. First, Sir, as to the injustice of this Bill. Sir, I will separete the history of Lower Canada into four epochs:—first, from 1773 to 1810—secondly, from 1810 to 1828—thirdly, from 1828 to 1834—and fourthly, from 1834 to the present period. In the year 1774, the French law was introduced into Lower Canada with certain reservations. The English Cri minal Law was established—juries, end certain togljsh rules of evidence. Now, any lawyer (and I see many before me, Sir), relay conceive the curious anomalies which such a mixture would produce—there is a familiar term which will aptly designate it—" Hotch potelt," To a civil code, established on French principles, was joined a criminal law founded on that of England, During the Year 1774, it so happened that the English on the Continent of North America were in open rebellion. There was a spirit raised amongst them which rebelled agaleet the domination of England. They said, " We cannot bear it any longer ; you seek to impose laws upon us which are oppressive and tyrannical in their nature, What did the English do under those circumstances ? They resorted to the French colonists as a counterpoise to the Eng. lish, and said to them—" We will put down the puritanical fanaticism of those fellows." In confirmation of this statement I will just refer to a speech made by Lord Lyttleton its /774, to show that there was a dircet intention on the part of the Government of that day to creeee a French feeling in the Colony, a feeling that has since been den:et:need as mis chievous and abominable, but which was fomented aseel .ohe rished as lone' as it suited the corevetsieece of Government to do so. Lord Lyttleton said, in alluding to tht: apprehe nsio ns which had been expreseed of the increased ponce e eiii%r.l) this would throw into the hands of the French colon;ee e " that he saw no reason to apprehend any such conse quences, that he would employ them to jbdue and bring to their right seae,ee the rebellious spirits of the e.elenv ; and fanatic spirit which that from their local sitaittion they would be able to cheek she appeared tO actuate these persons—a spirit which like that of the laoue4heaels of England, was subversive of all law and authority, sieve e t heir own. e ag xi a s i t n e s d t , w w h -h i a c t h d l id he w a e r p d e o r ? sons Why, w prate And now, Sir, to coun t eract t h e mischievous spirit tt;at tiien without e cherished u n d e r 3 I t ' a r n e d n i c n h g law, it— we cherished French feelings, which certain persons attempt to I E : t n e it call mischievous, and h a d h o p es o f creat i ng b ase p reju d ices i u a m t inds. isa lA s 7 t e ro d u i s el p a e l r l io w d e o c f ou o l u d r e h o is m to a r k y e . th l e , at a , n si dians nr, is the first instance to which I will call the attention of the House. What is the next ? Why, that in the 18th year of George 111 . when this House, and the other House of Par liament, and all England, received a bitter lesson at the hands of rebellious colonists, found in their humil . ath n an acknowledgment of that demand, which, had the; ad ; tneteee : it at the commencement of the dispute, would have mai utained for them the fairest pro , . ir. ce of North Arnetna ; but which, denied until we were subdued by arms—.which being denied to the claims of justice, and only admitted to force, stands as a record to our shame, an I fear will not much redound to our justice. A declaratory Act was passed by which it was stated that there should be no levying of rates or taxes upon the colorests of Great Britain in North America, without the consent of their Legislature, and in 1791 that solemn pledge was eiven by the assembled Parliament of England, that there ,hoeld be nos levying of taxes, and no appropriation of revenue in Canada, except by the consent of the Canadian Legislature. In 1794 communications took place between the Governor and the Ileuse of Assembly on the subject . of the revenues. This is a part of the subject which it may be somewhat difficult to make the House understand. The revenues of the colony were divided into three branches. First, there were the revenues levied by the Provincial Act of Parliament ; secondly, there were the revenues levied by the British Act of Parlian ent ; and thirdly, there were the revenues raised from casual and terri torial sources. The revenues derived from the provincial Acts of Parliament—it will not be denied me—were under the control of the House of Assembly. On that there could be no doubt. But I am now going to lay claim to the revenues arising from the British Acts of Parliament, and also to the casual and territorial revenues. To these the House of Assembly was entitled by the arrangement entered into by the Governor (Lord Dorchester), who b said to the Ilouse of Assembly, "if you will transmit the revs n es which are raised by the Act of the British Parliament into a Civil List to be raised by the Act of the Canadian Assembly, we will give you the controul of the whole." Well they did so—they made the changes as the Governor desired. Thi. was in 1794; but the Royal assent was not given to the Canadian Bill at that time. It was given in 1796, and the pledge given to the House of Assembly at that time had not been redeemed up till the Ist and 2d of William IV., and then the) were told that it was a boon on the part of the British Government to redeem the pledges—that the Government had done a great deal for Canada, and that the House of Assembly was guilty of black ingratitude.—( Cries of Hear.) No—Sir, it is we that have broken faith ; and, up to the passing of the Act of the 1 and 2 of William the 4th, we had broken faith with the House of Assembly, and we are now endeavouring to take advantage of our own wrong.—( Hear, hear.) I hope the House will excuse me for reading the correspondence to which I have alluded, It is exceedingly painful to myself, and I must sup pose it to be tedious to the House. [The Learned Gentleman then .proceeded to read the letter of Lord Dorchester to the speaker of the House of Assembly of Lower Canada in 1794, o ff er ing te, place under control of that House the casual and ter ritorial reietnie, which his Majesty had posssessed from the time of the Compiest, on the condition that the House should grant his Majesty a Civil List for the government of the Colony, without the votes of the British Parliament.] I hope there will be some attempt to show the injustice of the demand of the House of Assembly to those territorial reve nues thus solemnly given up by Lord Dorchester. ;land want to hear wherein the injustice arises—wherein it exists the Ilouse of Assembly is to be assailed by every epithet which ingenuity can invent for demanding the territorial revenues. Was not the information contained in that document, on the part of the Governor, who, being himself an Englishman, ,van accustomed to a representative Government—was not that information sufficient to induce the House of Assembly to direct their attention to keep it fixed on the appropriation of of the monies and the revenues of the country? And did it not eoutein a solemn pledge on the part of the Government to give a ill tine revenues to their =trout ?—( Hear, hear.) The House may be surprised why I urge this point so strongly, but it is to me matter of vital importance—it is that which the House of Assembly has elaireed up to the present hour, and it is for the making of this elairn that they are now to be punished. In the evidence of John Nelson who has sine's obtained an unenviable notoriety, it is most distinctly stated that this claim had never been given up—had never for one moment been abandoned—in fact this claire , was the 39 articles of their politi cal religion. Mr. Nelson is also asked whether there has ever been any instance where the Colonial Legislature has ever re ' pealed an English Act ? His answer is most distinctly—no ; we never pretend to anything of the kind. Such being the state of atTeirs they continued in the ;erne state up to 1810. The Government had a certain amount of looney appropriated to themselves—they did not go beyond that sum ; they did nut call on the Assembly for more moesay-...they were contented with the revenue given them. Whenever the House of Assembly asked what wee done with that money, the anewer was, we are contented with what we have got, and we will give fto aucnunt of it. It so happened that fir making that demand certain members of the House of Assembly were thrown into prison for making that proposal. Such is the way that Colonies are governed. Such is the way that irresponsible power is always used. Why was this the case? The explanation is clear. Everybody understeede why it was the cave. The officials of that country—and I ant new about to speak of a party who were the cause of all the noise that is made now— the officials said we do not like being paid by the House of Assembly. Why ? America is an economical coun. try. England is far from being so, Our scale of expenditure is wholly unlike the frugal expenditure of America. The Governor of Lower Canada, a minor officer, has a; touch pity as time President of the United States, who is at the head of a nation second to none upon the earth. What the Americane think sufficient for the payment of their President is thought by those who govern these things in Canada as hardll enough to pay the expenses of a delegated Governor from En g land. A Ilthe officers in Canada compare themselves with England, the people of Canada compare them with America. The people of Canada say everything in America is done efficiently but done cheaply. We here deal with millions as if they were thousands, and pay according to the extravagant rate of our own country. The parties there were exceedingly desirous of being paid by this country instead ofbcing paid according to the economical notions of America. They did all they could to fight off the possibility 'of the co ttroul on the part of this Assembly ; and from this has arisen all the evils, disputes, ill blood, and opposition that has arisen in Canada—to the resistance of the official par ties to the investigation of their parties. I will trace everything that has occurred to that cause. I will trace to that the desire of an Elective Council ; in let I will show that every mischief that has occurred iu Canada hag been consequent upon that. In doing so I am obliged to quote Mr. Nelson's evidence respecting the financial disputes. The Learned Gentlemen here referred to the evidence Of Mr • Nelson, and proceeded. This was thought a heinous offence on the part of the Assembly ; but Sir George Murray in his dispatch, which is not in this collection—it has doubtless been omitted fur some particular reason—Sir George ;Murray, in one of his dispatches, acknowledges that must of necessity be the cause, that so long as the Government of Lower Canada asked for no more money than the appropriated revenues all was right,but the moment they overstepped it, then came the in quiry what bad been done with the money. The Learned Gen tleman here referred to another part of Mr. Nelson's evidence. Sir, we hear a great deal about stopping, the supplies. which the Legislative Council threw out a Bill of SupPlY had passed the House of Assembly, on the ground that ;t was not safe to take an annual Bill. Who began the practice of stopping the supplies? The party predominant in the Legislative Council. Who are they? Sir, at that time there was an Eiecutive Council and a Legislative Council — two in name—one in reality. Time Legislative Council said " We will escape responsibility and eontroul—we will not have an annual Civil List—we will have a permanent Civil List, voted in one round sum ;" therefore they threw out the Annual Supply Bill; they set the example of refusing sup plies to the House of Assembly, and the House will be sur prised to hear—l challenge contradiction—that for once that the House of Assembly have refused supplies, the Legislative Council have done so three times. Two years only the House of Assembly have refused supplies; and for that they are to be deprived of the power of controlling the public expendi ture. Then came the famous Union project—a project which emanated from the very party who are now the controlling party in Canada.—who - devised and directed the machinery by whit h the Constitution of the Canadians was taken from them. Now, Sir, there is one very remarkable circumstance, I mean the failure of the Receiver-general. I mention this circumstance ass illustrative of the mode in which colonies are governed, and of the necessity of a very accurate supervision on the part of the Legislative Assembly. The Assembly wanted an account of the money in the hands of the Receiver - - general—the accounts were refused, and the House said we will a ppropriate no more money. The Receiver-general failed—he owed 100,0001. Some one will tell me this is an ell story. At this moment he owes the money. It is now 150,0001.—(Hear, hear.) I have heard it said they have got his estates—his estates do not cover one-tenth part of the whole sum. At this moment the chest is empty, and 150,000/. principal and interest have been robbed frem the Canadian Exchequer. By whom ? By one of the party who talked about the honour and prerogative' of the Crown, and said it would be an infringement on such honenr and prerogative if they were to listen to the demands of 'the A se embly. The Assembly said—we'll try you ; they did try him ; he preyed to be a bankrupt; never paid the money; and the people demanded of this country to pay back the money which its officer had teken, and this country re fuses. Loss" Dalhousie issued warrant; without any order, without any senetien from the Legislature. The Legislative Council went further—they threw out every Bill they could lay their hands on that was of eny possible utility to the coun try, and iu V,A27 and 1828, agents were Rent out to this coun try complaining of the manifold grievances ureter which that country laboured—l beg the House to bear in mind the fact that, they complained of the condteet of the Legislative Council in throwing ogt various Bills granting the aeceesary sums for all the expences of tlee. Civil Government in that Province. in the year 1828 a Committee vas appointed by this House to tai s e into consideration the claims of the people of Canada, and that Ceseas,itece acknowledged the justice of their pow plaints and rernonsarerseesesetliey solemnly stated that the Le '-'ssjvc Council did net haemotese with the opinions or wishes of too escoesle----ths?.t geese ehld be spine alteration in the Legislative 6ouss4 et? harsetopiee —they did not point out the mean:, ihty ! l ee l a i• e d that the 1/ppse, as then existing, did not harmonize with ti e feel, ings of the pehple. I have now, Sir, got to the year 1828. 1 have got td that year wlsen ;11 the _demands of the House of Aseemble, respecting'their Coneret4 (lee their own revenues were aleetar - ed t t.o be jusi, : to lib wise, and' to he provident. I come now to that year 1n which the Legislatlie COlsncil ii condemned—l come to that year in which it is stated that justice is Lot auniinistereti iii the Ivey in weicti it ought to be from the peculiar political condition of the judges. And now all the claims of the House of Asseml ly in the year 1828 having been granted—all its grievances having been redressed —it is asserted that, instigated by a factious spirit of opposition, and led on by factious demagogues, they aredesirous of bringing forward new demands, making new calls on the country, and fabri cating new grievances. My assertion is that the old grievances remain, and that if they have made new demands, is is because they have discovered that the remedies applied have not been sufficient to redress these grievances. In the year 1831 a li beral Government was formed—a Government accustomed to declaim against oppression—a Government composed of per sons who had been the e.dvocates of the rights of the people on the opposition benches—a Government composed of persons who have individaallv declared against the form of that very Constitution of which the Canadian people complain ; in fact, the friends of the Canadians were supposed to be in power; men who have laid down broad principles of liberty—who have offered their lives for the freedom of their country ; and in consequence of the declarations of those strong and sworn supporters of the cause, the feelings of the Canediani were naturally raised high—their expectations were elevated, and they said—" Oh, now we have got our liberal friends into ' office, men who told the people of Upper Canada to stop the supplies if they wanted their Constitution altered ; why, we have got our friends into power, said they, and shall we not have a remedy for our grievances ? They indeed expected those things ; but, like many others, they had been most egregiously disappointed in what is called a 1 Liberal Government. When this Government first came into office, it had to consider the alterations proposed by the Committee of 1828—and what was the chief of those eke ; rations ? I shall quote a very short passage from the Report 1 of the Committee. One of the subjects to which their in quiries were directed was the state of the Legislative Councils of both Canadas ; and the manner in which they had answered the enquiries was this :—[The Learned Gentleman then read an extract from the Report of the Committee, which strongly recommended that a very great alteration should be made in the composition of the Legislative Council, and that the ma jority of its members ought not to be Officers of the Crown. The extract also stated the opinion of the Committee, that if the House of Assembly and the Legislative Council could be put upon a proper footing, all the minor grievances of the Ca nadians would be easily remedied.] In this extract the Com mittee showed that they understood to what the desires of the people of Lower Canada were directed. They saw that the great desire of the people was the improvement of the Council, and they stated so much as plainly as men could who wished to take upon themselves as little responsibility as possible. They said that a serious alteration must be made in the composition of that body. Well, the alterations were made, but the people were not satisfied. They naturally said, " if you choose to put more men upon the Council it does not follow that you have altered its character. The majority is still against the people —you may choose two or three men whom you call inde pendent, but they are the very people whom we say ought not to be in it, and we say that you are merely keeping the word of promise to the ear, but that you violate its spirit." That this was really the case I can show upon authority which Ministers will not im pugn. For this I can quote the Report of the Commissioners appointed by themselves to inquire into the grievances of the Canadians. [The Learned Gentleman then reed an extract from the Report of the Commissioners of 1835, strongly con demning the co.nposttion of the Legislative Council of that period.] From this I should infer that - the House of Assem bly was justified in saying that the political character of that body was the same in 1833 as it was in 1828, and that they de manded, as might be expected, an elective Legislative Council. They said " We want to have reforms, but we will do so with the slightest alteration possible." That was the offer made by the people of Canada—but it was not acceded to. The Canadians then said " We are placed in a new position. We ,ave proposed our alterations—they have not met the ICA'S of the Ministry—therefore we will have more." hat is the consequence of this ? You fancy that men on the other side of the water are without feeling—that they may be nsultednyith impunity—that they may be called all species of :names with perfect safety. And the then Secretary of State, `Mr. Stanley, wrote out to the Governor, and immediately said this was what was called a National Convention—pretty broadly intimating this was to be a copy of the National Convention of France. One may easily conceive what inference people drew from that statement. Why did he liken that Convention of Assembly to the National Convention of France ? Why, it was an everyday Convention that took place in America. He ought to have known, for he had been a traveller in those parts, that the Conventions were almost a matter of course when any alterations were proposed in the Constitution of that country. At this moment a Convention is sitting in Phila delphia for the purpose of re-modelling the Constitution of that great and independent sovereign state. All is going on quietly ; the people are determined upon the form of the Constitution—that peaceable people never think of the wild theories of the National Convention of France. They had not in their minds Robespierre and Dan ton—they had in their minds Franklin, Jefferson, Washington, end Jay. These were their heroes. But somehow or other, Sir, our people here are so occupied by everything in their immediate neighbourhood that they cannot possibly conceive the state of mind of people in other countries, and then they all at once cry out—" Oh, good God, we are to have :ill the horrors of the revolution of 1793," and M. Papineau is nothing more nor less than the abettor of these men.—( Hear, hear.) I have heard it gravely stated in this country—l have heard M. Papineau likened to Robespierre— I have heard the French Canadians called French Republi cans—l have heard the National Assembly likened to the Na tional Convention of France—l know that was asserted on the highest authority, an 1 that it was nothing more nor less than an attempt to introduce a set of demagogues in the country I say, Sir, when the House of Assembly received this sties. ment they were, very naturally , hi g hl y incensed. They' stated that the Right Hon. Gentleman must have known the state of the country. I think they were wrong in that. He knew nothing about it. I am sure he did not. And the House of Assembly were, therefore, grossly in error ; but it was a pardonable one. Although he knew nothing of the country, yet he brought forward measures which were to regulate it. The House of Assembly were greatly incensed—they said this is an insult to tie. Added to this there was another source of grievance—they said, you have added to your Legislative Council—you butcher our people ; and, added to this, they recollected also that a circumstance had taken place at Montreal which would never be forgotten, namely, the shoot ing of the peasants at St. Denis. They said that Govern ment is not parental that sanctions such things in a country so peaceful, that no disturbance which required even the in terference of a constable's staff had taken place. The people of Canada have never forgotten that, and they never will. Recent events, too, have only served to render still deeper that already unfavourable impression whieli the Canadian people have to this country. I say, Sir, that if you do not take care what course you pursue, something will come that will read you a lesson of humility after the fashion our ancestors were humiliated. Sir, I have now brought down this subject to the year 1834. In that year the first real and sincere determination to stop the supplies took place. In that year there were no - supplies, but the House of As sembly passed resolutions, as they had done before, stating their grievances. A Committee was appointed, but that Committee came to an untimely end, Sir, Mr. S. Rice succeeded Mr. Stanley at the Colonial office, and in an interview which lie had with two gentlemen agents of the Assembly and myself, he said he was anxious to do justice to the Canadian.. We had scarcely left the office, when a despatch was penned, directing the Governor of Lower Canada to pay the officials whom the Assembly had determined not to pay ; and he sup posed that be had got out of the difficulty by the special plea, that he did not, as Lord Dalhousie had done, take the money out of the public chest, but ordered the Governor to pay the officials—drawing upon the Treasury for the money. No wonder for the House of Assembly to' be incensed, and to complain of the conduct of the Governor in paying the Civil List. In IBIS they had come to the determination to refuse the supplies until their grievances were redressed. In 1835, however, they found the Governor Lad paid the amount of the Civil List, and naturally incensed at this they again refused the supplies for 1835.—( Hear. ) Unfortunately for the good intentions of Mr. Spring Rice, it did happen that just at the very instant that that plan, that gicat anti statesmanlike aff iir, that was to startle all beholders, was to issue from the Colonial Office—it so happened that on that day, as the Right Hon. Gentleman was passing down Pall-mall, he met a gentleman, and told him that he was out of office. Well now, but there is one remarkable circumstance before he went out of office, to which I would wish to call the attention of the House, because it was brought as a charge against the House of Assembly that they were as little caretul of the independence of the judicature of the country, that be cause a certain gentleman held an opinion contrary to them they withheld his salary, and would not put it into the Civil List, and thence it is concluded that the House of Assembly desire to exercise an improper control over the judicature of the country. Now it so happens, that before Mr. Spring Ri c e went out of office he heard of the appointment of Mr. Justice Gale, and when called upon to allow his appeintment, the Right Hon. Gentleman wrote to the Colonial Governor. [Here the Learned Gentleman reed the letter. We have n ot a copy of it ; but it was to this effect : That it was at all times of the highest importance, and more especially at a mo ment like that which then existed, that no person partaking of the character of a political partisan should be placed upon the bench in Lower Canada. He hoped, therefore, that the Ca nadian bar would be found capable of furnishing some gentle man of more calm and temperate views than the individual re commended. When he adverted to the line of conduct taken b y Mr. Gale is 1828, and to his connection with certain mea sures of that time, he (Mr. S. Rice) very much feared that he w ould be looked upon with distrust by a very coc3ithica,ble por tion of the community in Canada, Under these circumstances (lie added) lie was not disposed to recommend the confir mation of Mr. Gale's appointment]. Now, Government news did not travel very fast, as he ( Mr, Roebuck) had reesen to know ; and it so happened stint the tows which carried out the Right Honourable Gentleman's dismissal from office travelled more rapidly than the Right Honourable Gentle man's refeleal to confirm the appointment of M r . Jus tice Gale. Lord )sylmer, therPfolT ? iinqing that the Right ilenouraisle Gentleman had been dismissed, and having received no eoreenumeatien from him relative to Mr. Justice Gale, trick it upon hirnsete tq conllrm thqt gentleman in his seat upon the bench, at the sa me time wrici ii g to 1,.0rd Aber deen, the new Secretary for the Colonies, stating the reasons why t he did Ito! 1- , Ard Aliefcleep theegh; the elrtaliatiop stAlli cent, and aliowecl Mr, 4 44 stic.e slate eo remain upon the bench. But the House of Assembly was of opinion that a man whose conduct had been such as to give rise to such grave and serious objections on the part of the previous Secretary for the Colo could never be expected to g ain the eonAdinsee of a greee portion of the cOmp44 , 4y over' whicb he e wal 'id` 'act as said liou4e of Assembly, " we, being the representatives of the community, and knowing that justice depends for half or more than half its influence upon the opinion of the people for whom it is administered—know ing, too, what the opinions of the people are with respect to Mr. Justice Gale, and seeing that his conduct has been so solemnly impugned by the head of the Colonial de partment in England, we, in our representative capacity, and acting in accordance with the vices of Mr. Spring Rice, will not allow hi s sa l ar y." Thi s was the true history of the matter with respect to Mr. Justice Gale ; and when charges were brought against the House of Assembly he wished to know why the whole truth was not told ? He (Mr. Roebuck) remembered a great impression being once made upon the House of Commons by the statement of a Co lonial Secretary that the House of Assembly (against which the Secretary wanted at that time to make out a case) had refused to reimburse Lord Aylmer for the expense he had been put to in his efforts to protect the colony from the visitation of the cholera. It was said that Lord Aylmer had expended 7,0001. for that purpose, and that the House of Assembly had refused to repay him, upon the ground that he had exceeded his authority in making the disbursement. A statement of that kind was made by a gentleman filling the situation of Colonial Secretary ; but it was afterwards proved that that gentleman must have been guilty of some culpable negligence in reading or arranging his information, as every one of his as sertions turned out to be untrue. In the first place the sum expended was 7001., not 7,0001. ; and in the second place Lord Aylmer, when he applied to the House of Assembly, was repaid at once. Yet months went over, during which the impression obtained against the House of Assembly that they were so base, so bad, so dishonest, so utterly heartless, as to refuse the repayment of a sum which had been expended for a purpose so humane and necessary as that of endeavouring to prevent the access of a terrible pestilence. The person who made that statement was Mr. Stanley. This was the way, in deed, in which successive Governments talked of the House of Assembly, and it unfortunately happened that the House of As sembly was not here to answer for itself, nor could its defence be attempted, except by chance, and by the voice of one man against the voices of a hundred. He (Mr. Roebuck) re. membered in earlier days reading the history of one of the matchless characters of antiquity, who said that his character had been assailed for a life, and could not be defended in an hour—that his assailants had occupied many years in poison. ing the public mind against his character, and that when he was brought to the bar of trial for life or death he felt himself in such a position that he could not wipe off the stain which those artful assailants had been careful to implant upon the public mind : he felt, therefore, that he stood before a jury almost condemned before he was heard. That matchless character, with whom he (Mr. Roebuck) became acquainted in the course of his scholastic reading, was Socrates. Like the life-long, assailants of Socrates, men were in the habit of getting up in that House, and with a total disregard of truth, or a total ignorance of facts, and making assertions with re spect to the House of Assembly which they knew could riot be answered, except after the lapse of a considerable time, during which the poison of their statements would be allowed to eat its way in the public mind. Statements of this kind had frequently been made by persons holding high and responsible situations in the Government, but who seemed utterly care less of whether their statements were true or false as long as they produced the impression desired. He (Mr. Roebuck) raaintained that this partial dealing with the truth, this garbling with evidence, was more fitting to Old Bailey prac titioners than to those who advised her Majesty and directed the councils of the State. He would now return to the stream of his narrative. Upon the dismissal of Mr. Spring Rice, Lord Aberdeen was appointed to the Colonial Secre taryship, and with the Administration of whichthat Noble Lord was a member, was originated the bright idea of a Commis sioner, and a Commissioner was in consequence appointed. But it so happened that the Government of which Lord Aberdeen was a member did not stand—it was not permanent. The succeeding Administration, however, was exceedingly delighted with the idea of the Commission. But, not wishing to take anything which assumed the appearance of an improvement from their opponents, they determined to do something that should be their own, and with characteristic intelligence and zeal they at once destroyed everything that was good in the Commission; for, instead of confining the responsibility of the Commission to one man, they determined to extend it to three. And how did they extend it ? What character did they give to their Commission ? The com pounded it of three different sets of politicians. Of these three Commissioners the first was a High Tory, the second (the term seemed contradictory, but there was no other to supply its place) a Tory-Whig, and the third a Radical-Whig. These three men went out to Canada, bound together by one Secre tary. What did they go to do ? To inquire. True, they went to inquire, but what about? The grievances of the people. But the grievances of the, people were best reflected by the body which had been elected as the representative of this whole of them. The House of Assembly, therefore, very properly said, " We are the people ; we are returned as the represents tatives of the people, in a manner which you cannot impogn— you do not pretend to say that we do not represent the opinions and feeling of the great majority of the peoplo—why, there fore, send out a Commission to supers_ede us, who assemble here under the sanction of an Act of the British Legislatare, whilst the Commission comes out only under an order of the Crown ?" However, the Commission went out, tiud if he (Mr. Roebuck) wanted anything that should luatilY in every parti cular the proceedings of the House of Assembly in Lower Canada, he would point to the Report of the Commissioners to furnish him with that justification. Every part c.,f it atiOrdeci a complete justification for every act of that branch of the Co lonial Legislature. First and foremost, there was a sort of sec-saw as regarded the Constitntien, but all the facts adduced in the Report went to thQ complete justification, cif the House of Assembly. Thera was a good deal of parade about the Report-a.a good deal of sound and fury I first, there was the full broadside of the Commissima, Then the single gun of Si; Charles Grey, and then the replication of Sir George Gipps, and what between the broadside, the single gun, and the re plication; there was a vast deal of confoaism in the Report ; but those who were enabled to see their way clearly through it could not fail of arriving at the peasolusion that in every particular the House of Assembly, had been right. He would read a passage from the Hopurt, which, if it had an) meaning at all, would go directly to the proof of that aaaertion. He quoted, now from the general Report—eha general broadside of the Com missioners. The passage ran thus :—For a number of years the Council, keeping, as it did, in close union with the Exe. outive prevailed ; but in process (If rinse the inherent fore of a popular Assembly developed itself ; and in the went con test that ensued ebout money matters the A;;L:.wribly came out completely successful." That was to say, that in a dispute , which had lasted from th e y eax 18t0 to the year 1E1.2&, the Assembly at length prevailed. It was to be atsumed, then, that the Assembly was right. " During the financial strug gle, continued as it was for more than a quarter of a century, it was only natural that other oellateral causes of difference should arise ; and, if we were to examine into these, we be lieve that we should also find that in every one of them the Assembly has carried its point." That was to say, that for upwards of a quarter of a century the House of Assembly had not demanded a single ilt:ng which was not ultimately granted to them; the inference, of course, was, that they had de manded only that which was right.—( Hear, hear.) The Com. missioners continued—" Asa few instances we will mention the right of the Howie to accuse and bring to trial public offi cers ; their right to appoint an agent in England"—he (Mr. Roebuck hoped that that would satisfy the House at least upon the point of agency—" and their right to controul their own e expenses; their demand f or t h e withdrawal of the judges political affairs or f rom seats i n the legislative tinge fromnt bodies or the executive councils, and to: the surrender of the proceeds of the Jesuista' estates. All these are points on which contests have taken place between the two Houses, and in every one of them the popular branch has prevailed, -and the Council been successively driven from every position it had attempted to maintain. The Assembly, at the same tiuw„ by attacking abuses in the administration, and bringing charges against numerous officers of the executive, succeeded scarcely 1.63 in exposing the weakness of the Government than of the Council." It was very strange that the word " weakness" should be introduced into that part of the Report. How was it that the House of Assembly became successful ? Not be cause the Government was weak—the Government was strong enough if it pleased to put down the House of As. sentbly—the reason why the Assembly succeeded was be cense the Government was wrong. The Report proceeded : Both the Council and the Government have been worsted in many a struggle that they never ought to have engaged in; and if the Assembly has in consequence grown pre sumptuous, we apprehend that such is only the ordinary effect of an unchecked course of succeaa." The next was, he thought, one of the most extraordinary state ments ever put forward upon a, sithject of this kind -,—ln the course of these protracted disputes, too, it has happened that the Assembly, composed almost entirely of French Ca nadians, have constantly figured as the aesortors of popular riehts, and as the advocates of liberal institutions, whilst the Council, in which the English interest prevails, have, on the other hand, been made to appear as the supporters of ar bitrary power, and of antiquated political doctrines; and to this alone we are persuaded the fact is to he attributed that the majority of settlers from the united States have hitherto sided with the French rather than the English party, The representatives of the counties of Stunstead and Missisqu o i h ave not been sent to Parliament to defend the feudal sys tern, to protect the French language, or to oppose a system of registration. They have hoe'n sent to lend their aid to the assertors of popular Tights, and to oppose a Government by w hi c h , in their opinion, settlers from the United States have been neglected or regarded with disfavour." Now, he begged the House to observe iti the next sentence the man ner in which the Lni7,lative Council sought to extend Bri tish feelings, and to protect British interests in the province. If he understood anything about English feelings or English interest in the colony, it would niean this : that English feelings were in favn,nr :.; a free representative gOVuzi ment, and opp9seci t., everything which had the appearance of arl4tl' lo :y power—th a t E ng li s h feelings were in favour of municipal institutions which subsiste.d, iii England, and op posed to the system of aeia.satrzation which obtained in France. The cowsilissionere went on to say s-sa" Even during Qtr aesidence in the province we have ,C , t3Fl - the Council continue to act in the same spirit, and discard what we be lieve would have proved a moat sanitary measure, in a manner which can hardly 16e taken otherwise than to indicate at least a coldness towards the establishment, oi . customs calcu lated to exercise the judgment ~ , n4 promote the general im provement of the petnaie e ate allude to a Bill for enabling. parishes 0 losnihips to elect local officers and assess them selves for local purposes, which measure, though not abso lutely rejected, was suffered to fa'l to a way that &lased no friendliriess to the prine4Ae.ts i!,kes ( , ‘ O ksi A a see that principle? The principle., eieslreeeet t atlae. ' 1 often ti9,i , i 6t i f i'm lisegislative Assembly was the great assertor goaernment. They were very and vindicator of the English interest in Canada. He (Mr. Roe buck) asserted the precise contrary ; and he quoted evidence from the report of the Commisaiosseas themselves to show that in the mils' instances in which it had ever done anything it had done all it could to support, protect, and maintain the prin ciples of arbitrary power. He had prsv:d i that the Legis lative Council was Fr e n c h so f ar f or th e s t was favourable to its oen arbitrary power, and English so far forth as it could create a prejudice against the House of Assembly. —[liero the Learned Gentleman became for some moments inaudible.] When we next heasd him he was saying that first and foremost he must observe how remarkable it was that Witesh merchants on going out to Canada should all at once be so very much struck at ;he absence of a registration-office in that country, when, as was well known, there was no ge neral registration-office in England. It was a curious fact that in this country, with the exception of the counties of Middlesex and York, there was no office for the re. gistratiun of deeds, mortgages, &e. How was it, then, that merchants on going to Canada all at once discovered that an establishment of that kind was essential to the pro tection of their interests ? Some ingenious person might, perhaps, discover the cause; but he (Mr. Roebuck) confessed that it came not within the scope of his powers of penetra tion. In the midst of all the contention upon the subject, it bed invariably happened that the House of Assembly had wished to promote all the real and substantial advantagesof an office of registration ; but they said, " We will not pass such a Bill as shall throw the poor persons of the country into the hands of a notary," Perhaps the House would ex cuse him if he entered into a short explanation upon the point. It so happened that under the old English law mortgages might be effected upon laud over and over again, and for more than twice its value, without the possibility of inflicting any kind of punishment upon the person by whom the money was obtained. But by the French law, if: a mortgage for more that the value of the land were of it would come within the scope of a law known under the generic term of " Stcllionat," and which meant nothing more nor less than that an offence of this kind amounted to felony. The House of Assembly found that in consequence of the wholesale introduction of the English law io the mari ner of which he (Mr. Roebuck) had already complained, no punishment was attached to an offence which they had always previously been taught to regard as a crime. They fonnd. that, according to the English law, which was new to them, a person who mortgaged his land for more than its value could not be punished. " Therefore," said the House of Assembly, " we will endeavour to get at this class of offenders by esta blishing a law which shall be in accordance with our old law of Stellionat.'" A Bill having that object in view accord ingly passed through the House of Assembly, but the Le gisletive Council threw it out. And yet the Legislative Council called itself the defender and asserter of English interests in the colony, and constantly complained of the absence of an office of registration. In the Bill passed by the House of Assembly the means were afforded of esta blishing a registration-office, or an institution that, in all respects, should be tantamount to such an office ; but the Legislative Council refused to take it. Why ? Because, in reality and in truth, they did not desire to see a sys tem of registration established—they did not desire to make fraudulent mortgages a crime, but they did desire to have the means of creating a prejudice against the House of Assembly. If there were one thing which more than another distinguished the institutions of England, it was the manner in which all local affairs were left to the management and con troul of local authorities. In this respect the institutions of England afforded a strong contrast to those of France, where the pernicious system of centralization placed the management of all the affairs of the country in the capital. He would ex plain this point in a few words, by quoting the language of Mr. John Neilson, to whose testimony he liked to refer. Mr. Neilson, in his examination before the Committee of 182 S, was asked," Are persons who settle in the townships, holding land upon the English tenure of free and common soccage, exposed to any other difficulties than those which arise in the adminis tration of the Courts of law ?" Mr. Neilson replied, "I do not think that those people complain of anything except that they are far out of the way ; because, unfortunately, the grants were made to them in a remote part, in preference to the grants being made nearer to the St. Lawrence. But their great object has been to obtain a representative in the Assembly of the province ; and they have met in their usual way upon Stumstead Plain, and have declared that they , were satisfied with the Bill that was passed in the Assembly, and they have petitioned the Assembly and the Council to pass that Bill. They say that in the event of that Bill pass ing, they think they can get a remedy for all their grievances; that the first thing they want is to get a representation in the assembly of the Province, and the assembly of the Province is willing to join them in redressing their grievances ; but any person that by chance happens to have connection with the tsiwnsliips, goes and speaks as if he was deputed by the town ships. We have had twenty different stories told us in that way; but the moment they have representatives of their own to speak for them, everybody will believe them, and there is no doubt they will get a remedy for everything they complain of. There is one thing that is desired to give them, which they have in the United States, and that is the power of regu lating their own little local concerns, which, I conceive, con trihetes very much to the prosperity of the United States ; every district of the country regulates matters of common con venience, such as roads and bridges—what can be done by an individual is done by a common effort of the whole community, as determined by the majority; whereas in the townships they (sett get nothing done without delays and expenses." Mr. Neilson was then asked to " describe the difference be tween the state of things in that respect in Canada and i s the United States?" He answered in these t eems In Canada we have been plagued with an old French system of government : that is to say, a Government in which the people have no concern whatsoever, every thing must proceed from the city of Quebec and the city of Montreal, and persons must come to the city of Quebec and the city of Montreal to do every thing, instead of being able to do for themselves in their own localities. In the United States they have the English system, by which every locality has certain powers of regulating its own con cerns, by which moans they regulate them cheap, r and better; whereas with us a man must make a journey to Quebec ; he must go to a great expence; he must bow to this mars and bow to that man, and rap at this door and rap at that door, and spend days and weeks to effect a little improvement of a road, or something of that kind, of common convenience to a district ; whereas all that is done in the United States without going out of his own small district." Now that was precisely what the House of Assembly wanted to do. They passed a Bill—passed it more than once, by which the people in the townships, against whom th e y were supposed to entertain so strong an animosity, were to have the con troul of their own concerns. The Legislati ve C ounc i l, how ever, invariably threw o u t th e Bill, because they said it was tainted with the principle of representation. Could anything afford a stronger proof that the real support of English interests was in the House of Assembly, and that the Legislative Council was the advocate only of those narrow and arbitrary views which were diametrically opposed to every English feeling? He now came to the demand of the House of Assembly for an Elective Council. He had shown that this dem an d was warranted, first by the rep or t o f the Corients!ioners, and next b y the conduct of the Legislative Council, which conduct had been SG bad as to give rise to the admission, even amongst those by whom it was supported, that it required reform. lie had shown that the Council was now in precisely the same state as it was when that admission was made. He had shown that the people themselves were dis satisfied with it; and finally he had shown that the House of Assembly had asked in a quiet, decorous, and respectful man ner that the people of the country might be allowed to meet in a national convention to determine whether or not the Elective Council were fit for them. The answer of the House of Com mons to that demand last year was a peremptory refusal ; but at the same time the House of Commons gravely and solemnly stated by its resolutions, that the Legislative Council required reform. Upon that occasion the House of Commons again so lemnly maintained the demand of the House of Assembly for a reform of the Legislative Council ; for, in the resolutions - which were passed at the same time that an Elective Council was refused, the House said " Nu—we will slot grant you the Elective Council, hut we see that you must have a reform in your Legislative Council ; at the same time we will take away your money, because for the last two years you have refused to vote the supplies"—and because the House of Commons could not pass a Bill in time to sanction the taking away the money, they sent out to the Governor of the colony instructions to ask the House of Assembly again to vote the supply. He now came to what he must regard as the very peculiar proceeding of the present Government in the dispute with the House of Assembly. The House of Commons and the House of Lords had voluntarily declared, in a series of resolutions to which they had severally and mutually agreed, that a reform in the Legislative Council was needed : at the same time they bade the colonial Governor demand the supplies of the House of Assembly, after having infringed the constitutional lights of that body in the most marked and extraordinary manner. He (Mr. Roebuck) said lie would be frank in this matter. He knew what would take place in Canada. He told the House what would take place, and his prophecies were verified to the letter. When the resolutions of last year went out the necessary consequence was that every man in ere colony asked himself " Are we to bear this?" What is the alternative ? It is clear that the Imperial Parliament, para mount in England, and indeed over the whole of its great empire, has decided against us ; we have, therefore, uo hope through the ordinary means of obtaining our de sir: s." "Is there, then, no alternativ e ?" was the national question which every man put to himself. It was put by the leaders of the people to the people themselves; and the answer of the people was, " The power of the Impe rial Parliament is so great that it may override us under aly cireumstanres ; therefore, we must submit." The determination, come to by the leaders was, to counsel the people to submit. He did not say that they did not ex pect a day to arrive when some other alternative might not present i self ; but the result was, they determined to sub mit. At the same time they said, "We are to be called together by the Governor—he is to present to us the resolu tioce of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Those resolutions a-u to be presented to us as a whole, and if the Governor gives us a fair opportunity of s a yi ng to o ur constituents that we have done all that we could do, and that all ha s b een d one for them that the Parliament of Gaeat Britain has determined we must yield, and for the present submit to the demands of the Government." Such were the feelings —and he (Mr. Roebuck) was bold in saying these things—he would pledge himself that such were the feelings and intentions with which the members of the House of Assembly vent to Quebec. The resolutions were placed before them as a whole, but what was the demand of Fire Governor ? Money, money, money ! But, said the House of Assembly, " iS ...here not something else in the resolutions? Is it all menesa, money, money ? Is there not sonic acknowledg ment eielbuse in the resolutions? Are you come only to ask for money ? Have you not any authority fur effecting some altera tion in the Legislative Council ?" Why did they ask this? Be causs, in point of fact, there had been circulated in Montrei!l, with a vast of demi-official authority, a Hat of the new Council t THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 23. 1838 ,